A motion for the Labour Party Conference to vote on whether Labour should support the scrapping of plans to renew the UK’s Trident nuclear missiles (at a cost of around £100 billion) has fallen. It won’t be debated.

Already the spin doctors are at work. The BBC tagline is “Jeremy Corbyn has avoided a showdown over his support for scrapping Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons.” He didn’t want to avoid a showdown – he wanted to have one!

The lack of a debate at conference means Mr Corbyn has more time to persuade MPs to take his side before Parliament votes on renewing the hugely expensive system, but This Writer would have preferred a decisive result sooner, rather than later.

It seems the unions voted against a debate. It seems some commentators may have to revise their opinions about Corbyn’s relationship with them, now.

7 thoughts on “Disappointment as Labour conference decides against having a vote on Trident”

trident is irrelevant if like a lot of people you cant even afford to live in this country because if you stay your going to die anyhow either by welfare reform if your sick and disabled or by marriage breakup etc leading to mental health and suicide

forget trident it could never be used and no one else could use theirs for the same reason it’s toxic to all wherever you are

defense is important don’t get me wrong but everyone is missing the vital point and that the real danger to the uk and its people is David Cameron and co and it’s the likes of him worldwide that are the main cause of conflict hence the call for trident

the answer is to get rid of people like David Cameron both at home here and in the wider world if peace is to be viable at some point

David Cameron going to the UN to speak about Bashar al-Assad President of Syria, saying he’s got to go, will fall on deaf ears in the same way the uk public were to say Cameron must go it isn’t going to happen

Nick, in many ways you echo my thoughts on this matter. Though, 100bn is a lot of money for something we can never use. Nonetheless, as the fifth richest country in the world it’s not that much when spread over several years.
Indeed, it just goes to highlight the fact that, as so wealthy a state, we do not need all the unnecessary austerity that’s being imposed – for ideological reasons rather than economic. Now counter that point Mr. Osborne.
shaunt

As I see it Trident is kept for one purpose and that is so that the UK can keep its seat on the UN Security Council. As a weapon it is grossly expensive and we should be questioning whether it really does anything for our “security”. It cannot be used without the express permission of the USA, which begs the question as to what sort of war the USA would drag us into, as our politicians fall over themselves to hang onto America’s shirt tails. Finally, Its use, which is unthinkable, would mean utter catastrophe for the UK and for Europe. The country should be debating whether or not we abandon this grossly expensive status symbol.

It was only a matter of time before the right wing elitist hijackers asserted themselves over Corbyn. First the EU, now Trident, next it will be economic and fiscal policy and finally the Tory Lites will get their way on Austerity. By the time Tory Lite have swamped JC there will be nothing left to vote for and many supporters will either not vote or vote for other parties in 2020. As for the Unions lack of support for Jeremy, if they continue to withhold it on key issues, they too will see their membership fall. I will of course monitor events within the LP, but if things continue in the same vein I and quite a few others will forsake the LP as a lost cause and devote my time to campaigning for PR in Electoral Reform and find a party that actually represents my views. Perhaps JC could convince people that waving a big stick at the Russian Bear will just get you flattened under a mushroom cloud of fire and radiation but given the mentality of some of the people in this country, I doubt it very much. Nuclear Proliferation is a very expensive exercise in mutual destruction in the face of an implacable protagonist like the US.

I don’t think you can call the unions “right wing elitist hijackers” – they’re the ones who scuppered the Trident debate.
Considering your mistake about that in context, let’s wait and see about the rest, shall we?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.